30ashopper
SoWal Insider
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/21/us/politics/AP-US-Obama-Budget.html
9 trillion in additional debt over 10 years would bring the total debt outstanding to around 20 trillion.
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Obama admin's parting gift: 9 trillion in additional debt
- Thread starter 30ashopper
- Start date
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/21/us/politics/AP-US-Obama-Budget.html
9 trillion in additional debt over 10 years would bring the total debt outstanding to around 20 trillion.
I would like to find one liberal Obama supporter give a honest answer to the debt Obama's administration is piling on future generations of Americans. And, don't mention Bush - Bush is no longer the president and he didn't spend this much is 8 years.
Smiling JOe
SoWal Expert
Thank God that Bush warmed us up to our Fed Gov't spending more and more.
Here is the thing that so many fail to see -- Regardless of which party is in control of the White House, Gov't feeds off of itself, and it will not get smaller on it's own. Not until the wealthy get so tired of paying taxes, that they live off their savings for a few years, will anything change in Federal spending. Money will be spent, just on different things depending on which party is in the Office.
Here is the thing that so many fail to see -- Regardless of which party is in control of the White House, Gov't feeds off of itself, and it will not get smaller on it's own. Not until the wealthy get so tired of paying taxes, that they live off their savings for a few years, will anything change in Federal spending. Money will be spent, just on different things depending on which party is in the Office.
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
Assume I come close enough to that description for you. 
I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.
However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)
I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).
However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!
I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.
However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)
I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).
However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
Assume I come close enough to that description for you.
I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.
However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)
I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).
However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!
generally though, you're willing to accept obama's debt as needed; somthing we'll have to deal with in ten years but not now due to desperate times?
TooFarTampa
SoWal Insider
I wish I could remember the name of the economic theory I read about yesterday, so I could link to something referencing it. Maybe a more well-versed econ guru could fill in with more detail.
As the theory goes, in a recession w/ significant job loss the deficit automatically grows dramatically, because of the one-two punch of income tax and other tax collections dropping fast, and the fact that the government automatically ends up spending more to bridge gaps. So I don't think we can call this "Obama's" deficit entirely, or even Bush's.
The flip side of this is that the recession also has a natural and automatic "floor," which seems to be what we are hitting now, with or possibly without the Obama administration's input (though I think both Obama and Bush made some good moves). Anyway it was an interesting little non-political, entirely economical item, but since it was a link within a link I have no idea where I saw it.
It did make sense to me though. I do think that the gravity of the situation is being considered. Whether it will be dealt with properly is another matter. That has been the issue with Obama as I see it. He is GREAT at explaining and attacking problems, but not sure yet whether he will have the leadership to really find the best solutions.
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
Yes, I accept this debt as needed, and REALLY wish that we had reserves to draw upon during these hard times instead of a pile of debt and red ink to add it to.
But I don't think the consequences are something we won't have to deal w/ for 10 years - obviously it has more immediate consequences than that.
Assume I come close enough to that description for you.
I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.
However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)
I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).
However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!
Great idea, but why not tax them at the normal marginal rates.
Bob
SoWal Insider
so obama is serving a ten year term
It is past time for Republicans to accept responsibility for the last 8 years, which will go down as a dark time fiscally for this nation. The congressional republicans would rather support a man just because of the letter beside his name than support principle and stick to a course that would have led to strengthening the long term stability of our nation.
Unfortunately, the democrats have decided that the last eight years gives them the right to spend even more instead of working to change back to fiscal responsibility. I am afraid that Bush's term will go down in history as the 2nd worst fiscal policy period in American history and Obama will be the worst.
Unfortunately, the democrats have decided that the last eight years gives them the right to spend even more instead of working to change back to fiscal responsibility. I am afraid that Bush's term will go down in history as the 2nd worst fiscal policy period in American history and Obama will be the worst.